Short answer Flashcards
What are the 2 critical factors to consider for a charge of murder?
Whether the offender intended to:
A. Kill the person or
B. Cause bodily injury that the offender knew was likely to cause death
If neither of these intentions can be proven, most likely charge is manslaughter
Murray Wright Ltd
Because the killing must be done by a human being, an organisation (such as a hospital or food company) cannot be convicted as a principal offender
An organisation can be convicted as a party to the offence of manslaughter. True or false?
Yes
An organisation cannot be convicted as either a principal or party to the offence of murder. True or false?
True.
Because murder Carries a mandatory life sentence
Section 160: Culpable Homicide
Homicide is culpable when is consists in the killing of any person by:
a. An unlawful act
b. An omission without lawful excuse to perform or observe any legal duty
c. Both combined
d. Causing person threats or fear of violence or by deception to do an act which causes his death
e. By wilfully frightening a child under 16 or a sick person
R v Horry: body not located
Death should be provable by such circumstances as render it morally certain and leave no ground for reasonable doubt.
Non-culpable homicide
- Homicide committed in self defence
- Homicide committed to prevent suicide or commission of an offence which would be likely to cause immediate and serious injury to person or property
R v Piri: Recklessness
Recklessness involves a conscious, deliberate risk taking. The degree of risk of death forseen by the accused under either Section 167 (b) or (d) must be more than negligible or remote. The accused must recognise a “real or substantial risk” that death would be caused
R v Desmond: Unlawful Act
Not only must the object be unlawful, but also the accused must know that his act is likely to cause death. It must be shown that his knowledge accompanied the act causing death
Section 72: Attempts to do
- Everyone who, having an intent to commit an offence, does or omits an act for the purpose of accompanying his object, is guilty of an attempt to commit the offence intended, whether in the circumstances it was possible to commit the offence or not
R v Murphy: Attempts
When proving at attempt to commit an offence, it must be shown that the accused’s intention was to commit the substantive offence. E.g, in a case of attempted murder l it is necessary for the Crown to establish an actual intent to kill
176: Accessory after the fact of murder
Liable for imprisonment of 7 years who is an accessory after the fact of murder
R v Mane: Accessory after the fact
For a person to be an accessory, the offence must be complete at the time of the criminal involvement
Voluntary manslaughter
Example: suicide pact
Mitigating circumstances, such as suicide pact, reduce what would otherwise be murder to manslaughter, even though the defendant may have intended to kill or cause GBH
Involuntary manslaughter
An unlawful killing which death is caused by an unlawful act or gross negligence. No intention to kill or cause GBH.
Explain the difference between S 179 (Aiding and abetting suicide) and S180 (Suicide pact)
Aiding and abetting suicide is actually assisting person in affecting their purpose of killing themselves. For example, obtaining drugs used to 1X, telling someone how to gas themselves.
Whereas a suicide pact is two or more persons forming an agreement to to kill themselves
What is a suicide pact?
A common agreement between 2 or more persons with the object of death of all of them
181: Concealing dead body of child
What is the intent required?
Intent to conceal the fact of its birth whether child died before, during it after birth
M’Naghten’s rules
Used to establish whether or not defendant is insane.
They do not know:
- The nature and quality of their actions OR
- That what they were doing was wrong
What is automatism?
Automatism is the state of total blackout during which a person is not conscious of their actions and not in control of them
Sane automatism
Sleepwalking, blow to the head, effects of drugs
Insane automatism
Result of Mental disease
Is automatism caused by alcohol or drugs a defence?
Automation by ingesting so many drugs or alcohol that they are not responsible for their actions is a defence available if the evidence of the defence can clearly raise the issue
If intoxication is used to try establish ignorance of the law, it will not establish a defence. True or false?
True
Compulsion: Compelling a person to do something against their will.
A person who commits an offence under compulsion by threats of immediate death or GBH from a person who is PRESENT when the offence is committed is protected from criminal responsibility if he believes that the threats will be carried out
R v Joyce: Compulsion
The court of appeal decided that the compulsion must be made by a person who is present when the offence is committed
Procedure when alibi witnesses are interviewed
- Advise defence counsel of the proposed interview and give reasonable opportunity to be present
- If defence counsel not present, endeavour to ensure witness is interviewed in presence of person not a member of police
- Provide copy of statement to prosecutor to give to defence
Section 158: Homicide defined
Homicide is the killing of another person, directly or indirectly
What does culpable mean?
Culpable means the killing is blameworthy. It includes murder, manslaughter or infanticide.
Section 178: Infanticide
A woman causes the death of any child under 10 in a manner that amounts to culpable homicide, and at the time of the offence the balance of her mind was disturbed by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to that or any other child, or by reason of lactation or of any disorder consequent upon childbirth or lactation
Defence of intoxication unlikely to succeed
Intoxication caused by alcohol or drugs may be a defence to all charges where their effect raises a reasonable doubt as to whether the offender had formed the law requisite intent for the offence
